1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. On September 15, 1994, while entering GS Construction Co., Ltd. and working for the deceased, the deceased B (hereinafter “the deceased”) took medical care on the job-related accident (including cerebral cerebral cerebral typhal typhal typhal typhal typhical typhical typhical typhical typhical typhical typhical typhical typhical typhical typhical typhical typhical typhical typhical typhical typhical typhical typhalphical typhical typhical typhalphical typhical typhical typhal typhal typhal typhical typhal typhal typhal cephal cephal cephal cephal cephal cephal

B. Since then, on July 2008, the Deceased received nursing benefits from the Defendant after being recognized as eligible for occasional nursing benefits. On June 8, 2013, the Deceased was found to have been used in the toilet for the senior citizen center, and immediately returned to a medical institution. However, on June 16, 2013, the Deceased died as brain livers by cerebrovascular (hereinafter “the instant injury and disease”).

C. On August 26, 2013, the Plaintiff, a wife of the Deceased, died on the part of the deceased who suffered from the previous accident. As such, the Deceased’s death, asserting that there was a proximate causal relation with the first injury branch, and filed a claim for the payment of bereaved family’s benefits and funeral expenses with the Defendant.

On September 3, 2013, the Defendant rendered the instant injury and disease that caused the death of the deceased on September 3, 2013, on the ground that proximate causal relation is not recognized between the first injury and cerebrovascular, and the first injury and disease, the bereaved family’s benefits and funeral site pay disposition (hereinafter “instant disposition”).

E. The Plaintiff, who was dissatisfied with the instant disposition, filed a request for review with the Defendant, but received a decision of dismissal on or around December 2013, and filed a request for review with the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Reexamination Committee (hereinafter “Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Review Committee”), but received a decision of dismissal on March 27, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 2-1, 2-2, Eul evidence 1, 2-2, and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The legality of disposition.

A. The plaintiff's assertion.